InOvercoming Our Community Resistance Backyard to Reentry Housing (A NIMBY Toolkit) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Summary and Table of Contents 2 Introductory Letter 3 Section 1: The Reentry Crisis 7 Section II: A Case Study 15 Section III: What Does the Fortune Academy Story Tell Us? 16 Section IV: Best Practices for Gaining Community Support - Applying Lessons Learned to Your Organization 19 Section V: Conclusion 20 Section VI: Endnotes

SUMMARY With over 725,000 men and women being released from prison each year, the need for housing assistance for the formerly incarcerated population is immense. Indeed, in addition to linking homelessness and incarceration, research has formerly incarcerated population at a disadvantage when trying to access safe and stable housing. For some, returning homeidentified to their a significant family is relationshipnot an option between as family homelessness members may and be re-offending. unwilling or unable Unfortunately, to accommodate a number them. of barriers Accessing place the housing in the private market also presents a challenge given high prices and landlords’ exercising their personal discretion to discriminate against people with criminal histories. Finally, public housing policies – both at the federal and local level – deny access to individuals with certain criminal convictions. overwhelming need with few resources. This toolkit highlights the experience of The Fortune Society in its development of a housingCommunity-based project in West service Harlem. providers Through around Fortune’s the country experience, working organizations in the reentry can gleanfield have strategies begun to to help respond them to overcome this one of the greatest challenges associated with providing housing to formerly incarcerated men and women. NIMBY lessonsopposition learned can result by Fortune, in significant this toolkit project provides delays, guidance or even shutand encouragementdown. This case to study those documents organizations how working an organization to assist formerlycan address incarcerated a myriad of people community and create concerns safer and communities. ultimately garner support for its project. By offering tangible steps and

This project was supported by Grant No. 2009-D1-BX-K016 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, the SMART Office, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not represent the official position or policies of the United States Department of Justice.

1 LETTER OF INTRODUCTION Dear Colleagues,

The Fortune Society and the Prisoner Reentry Institute at John Jay College of Criminal Justice are pleased to present to you this toolkit, In Our Backyard: Overcoming Community Resistance to Reentry Housing (A NIMBY Toolkit). It has been developed for organizations that have experience with providing housing to the reentry population as well as those for whom it is a new venture. The unprecedented number of men and women returning home from correctional facilities represents an important challenge. How we address the numerous needs experienced by this population today (including securing safe and stable housing) will help shape the way we think about and tackle issues that result from incarceration for decades to come. This toolkit shares lessons learned and successful practices culled from experience and provides a statement of possibility for others who are seeking to house needy and feared populations. In Fall 2009, The Fortune Society and Prisoner Reentry Institute at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, funded by

Castle,the U.S. a Department supportive residenceof Justice, forBureau approximately of Justice Assistance, 62 men and partnered women released to create from materials incarceration to provide to homelessness skill development in Westopportunities Harlem. Itfor is theset reentryin the academic field. This literature toolkit highlightson the relationship the experiences between of homelessness, The Fortune Society reincarceration as it established and criminal the resolution. This collaboration between complementary sets of expertise in reentry – that of a direct service provider and ajustice college involvement, of criminal andjustice is informed – was further by knowledge enriched byabout contributions organizational from change, the International leadership Center and the for psychology Cooperation of conflict and

Conflict Resolution at Teachers College, Columbia University. housing to formerly incarcerated people. Community opposition can be one of the greatest challenges an organization must face Thisas it toolkitworks tofocuses establish on helping services organizations for populations address that are a very considered specific “threatening.”issue when developing “Not in My the Back capacity Yard” to – provide commonly supporters.referred to as NIMBY – opposition can result in significant program delays or even complete shutdown. The Fortune Society case study illustrates how those who fiercely oppose a project in the beginning can become an organization’s strongest This toolkit begins with an overview of housing options for men and women being released as well as a review of others details of how The Fortune Society garnered community support for the project and developed a relationship of trust with itsworking neighbors. in this Readers field who will have learn been the successful nature of thein establishing strong opposition housing faced for their by the clients. Fortune The Society toolkit from then neighbors provides specificwho some twenty years. The toolkit culminates with key lessons and steps to help other organizations as they work to establish feared its arrival more than they feared the drug-ridden building and vacant lot that had endangered their neighborhood for or sustain housing efforts or begin to consider providing this service. Offering housing possibilities to people coming home from prison is challenging. Not only does it require a strong willbusiness see, the plan relationship and stable financing,The Fortune but Society equally eventually – if not more established importantly with – its it involves neighbors self-reflection in West Harlem about did organizational not develop overnight.capacity in Aorder great to deal sustain of skill, the patience,extensive and effort dedication to establish went a intosupportive developing relationship strong community with community support. members. However, As this you work has paid off tremendously for all involved. The Fortune Society just opened a 114 low-income apartment building and service centerWe hope directly the information behind the Castle.presented The in community this toolkit, fully including supported The itsFortune developmentSociety’s and case will study, benefit will from the new affordableWe hope units the informationthat are available. presented in this toolkit , including The Fortune Society’s case study, will provide guidance and encouragementprovide guidance to those and organizations encouragement currently to those providing organizations or those currently that are providing considering or providingthose that housingare options to considering providing housing options to their clients. We welcome you to contact The Fortune Society visit its twoif you Harlem have. residences. their clients. We welcome you to contact The Fortune Society if you have questions generated by this toolkit or would like to Sincerely,Sincerely,

JoAnne Page Jeremy Travis PresidentJoAnne and CEO Page President Jeremy Travis The FortunePresident Society and CEO John JayPresident College of Criminal Justice The Fortune Society John Jay College of Criminal Justice

2 I: The Reentry Crisis records. For example, the U.S. Department of Housing and Challenges for the formerly incarcerated Urbanhousing Development’s to a variety of “One categories Strike ofand people, You’re including Out” policy According to recent national statistics, about 725,000 requires that all local public housing authorities deny individuals are released from prisons and millions more cycle through jails each year, a volume of formerly those convicted of arson, violent crimes or drug-related incarcerated people reentering society never before offenses, those with histories of substance and alcohol seen. A complex set of factors renders these individuals abuse, and those subject to registry under state sex offender vulnerable1 to relapse to criminal activity, resulting in registration laws (Report of the Re-Entry Policy Council, 2003).Making matters worse is that no government agency is disturbingly high rates of recidivism. Nationwide, two jurisdictionally charged with ownership of the problems of recidivism and homelessness among the formerly incarcerated: Corrections and criminal justice agencies thirds of those released from prisons and jails are re- view their responsibility to the incarcerated population arrested for a new offense within three years and 54% integrationare re-incarcerated into society (Langan are that & Levin, the formerly 2002). Among incarcerated, the factors that undermine prospects for successful re- reentryas limited services, to the period including of custodial housing, care;does notparole fall agenciesunder the physically or mentally disabled, undereducated and arepurview underfinanced of any other and federal overwhelmed; or state agency and, providing (Rodriguez lackingin disproportionate in vocational numbers, skills and are experience, poor and andnon-white, have

& Brown, 2003; Black & Cho, 2004; Metraux, Roman & alcohol and substance abuse problems (Black & Cho, 2004; returns home to communities that are challenged by Cho,organizationally 2007). The burden to deal fallswith increasingly the pressing on need nonprofit to keep Reporthigh unemployment, of the Re-Entry poverty Policy andCouncil, crime 2003). and lack The reentry majority organizations that may be challenged financially and/or

the formerly incarcerated off the streets (Scally, 2005). services of adequate quantity and effectiveness (Black & Growing Interest in Supportive Housing Cho,Compounding 2004; Report ofthis the grave Re-Entry situation Policy is theCouncil, fact that 2003). this unprecedented volume of released individuals increases Against this grim background, there is hope. There homelessness. On average across the country, more than is a changing climate of greater receptiveness among policymakers to support programs that promote and the percentages are higher in large urban areas such successful reentry, thereby avoiding the huge costs of 10% are released from prisons and jails into homelessness; which receive the bulk of the formerly incarcerated and as New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Chicago, reincarcerationattention is being (Rodriguez directed in & particular Brown, 2003; at “supportive Black & Cho, 2004; Metraux, Roman & Cho, 2007). And, considerable wherestatistics from are 30 especially to 50% of worrisome parolees are in lighthomeless of studies (Black & Cho, 2004; Metraux, Roman & Cho, 2007). These housing” as an “effective and efficient approach to meeting p.5).the housing2 Supportive and specialized housing programs service needs provide of ex-offendersstable and concluding that homelessness, especially in the first 90 insafe one housing comprehensive to homeless program” formerly (Black incarcerated & Cho, 2004, men and days post release, significantly increases the high risk women alongside comprehensive and individualized ofto re-offendingstay safe and healthy,(Harding clean & Harding, and sober, 2006; apply Metraux, for jobs services, such as education and vocational training, Roman & Cho, 2007). Homelessness makes it difficult employment assistance and counseling, substance abuse treatment, access to medical and mental health care, family and Thesimply formerly maintain incarcerated hope (Rodriguez face considerable & Brown, 2003). barriers to directed at promoting independent living and reintegration reunification counseling, and other specialized services obtainingmay be unwilling safe and or stable unable housing to house (Report them ofor, the in some Re-Entry cases, growing evidence that supportive housing for homeless Policyhome is Council, not safe. 2003; Private Black housing & Cho, is 2004). typically Family priced members beyond intoformerly the community incarcerated (Black persons & Cho, reduces 2004). recidivism, There is makes their means, and the landlords discriminate against those with criminal records. Those recently released often cannot avail themselves of housing programs for the homeless, neighborhoods safer, promotes family re-unification, and is more humane and cost-effective than re-incarceration homelessness. As for public housing, a combination (Black & Cho, 2004; Rodriguez & Brown, 2003; Seiter & ofbecause federal they and do local not policies meet the excludes programs’ many definitions with criminal of Kadela,2 2003).“Supportive housing,” as a term, came into widespread use

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/newsroom/pressrelease/2009/ under the Homeless Assistance Act, created the Supportive Housing . The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), a Demonstrationin 1987, when the Program. U.S. Department In its broadest of Housing sense, and it is Urban housing Development, that is 1 linked with social services tailored to those with special needs who trendsbjs/100001.htm at the state level for a variety of criminal justice related and face the threat of homelessness, whether because of substance abuse, divisionprisoner of reentry the U.S. issues. Department To access of Justice,information breaks on down such trendsnational and HIV/AIDS, domestic violence, former incarceration, chronic mental statistics, visit www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/reentry/reentry.htm.

illness or physical or developmental disability (Glauber, 1996). 3 Despite its promising nature, nationwide there are »» The Cornerstone Program in San Fernando Valley, relatively few supportive housing programs targeted for homeless formerly incarcerated persons. This is the result identifying services to homeless adults with CA, provides housing, mental health and benefit- and the challenge that local opposition poses to the siting Angeles County jail system. This program contracts both of the difficulty in creatively financing the projects chronicfor a certain mental number illness of who emergency are leaving beds the with Los a

of supportive housing programs (Report of the Re-Entry memorandum of understanding with a private APolicy Diversity Council, 2003;of Supportive Metraux, Roman Housing & Cho, 2007). Models Loslandlord Angeles who housing remodels shelter buildings program and andthen has rents a The supportive housing programs that do exist are term supportive housing for program participants. located in large, urban areas and are, in fact, designed and Cornerstonethem to Cornerstone also outright to provide owns short-nine small and medium- properties that it rents to clients at a subsidized – although a few come about as a partnership between rate. operated primarily by private not-for-profit organizations corrections. They vary in format along several dimensions. »» a nonprofit organization and a local department of 3 St. Leonard’s Ministries in Chicago, Illinois had been offering reentry services for over 40 years Onemanagement distinction services is between (e.g. Heritagethose that Health provide and scattered-site Housing in permanent supportive housing facility. This was before opening, in 1999, its first “second stage” Newhousing York with City) mobile to those staff that providing provide supportivecomprehensive housing case and case management services at a single site congregate who had already completed a transitional housing specifically for men recently released from prison facility (e.g. Fortune Society’s Fortune Academy in New York program. The facility, St. Andrew’s Court, is City and Delancey Street Foundation in San Francisco). The adjacent to the agency’s reentry services facility, programs also vary in the length of time that housing is provided to clients. Some programs provide only emergency are funded by the Department of Corrections ensuringat a cost just a continuum below the of cost care. of Tenproviding of the 42parole units (e.g. Amity Righturn in San Diego), while others provide supervision, in exchange for the agency providing or short-term transitional housing, typically up to 90 days housing, supportive services and supervision of the from several months to several years (e.g. Providence House longer-term transitional housing that may vary in length parolees. The other 30 units are subsidized with housing for those unable to live independently in the disabled individuals with or without a history of HUD Shelter Plus Care funding for homeless and communityin Brooklyn). due Some to chronic programs mental offer illness permanent or other supportive reasons incarceration. (e.g. Heritage Health and Housing in New York City). »» Delancey Street Foundation, based in San Francisco,

congregate supportive housing facilities for The various models also differ as to the population CA,homeless operates persons, several with self-help, or without self-supporting incarceration broadlyserved, fromto the those formerly that serviceincarcerated. a specific For groupexample, of formerly Ridge histories, where the residents spend a minimum of Houseincarcerated in Reno, persons Nevada to targets those that transitional offer their housing services and services to those struggling with substance abuse, and the credo “each one, teach one,” all of the work is two years and often as long as 4 years. Following Greenhope Housing in East Harlem, New York City provides done by the resident participants, with the more housing and services for up to six months to formerly experienced teaching the less experienced. Each resident receives educational and occupational training that prepares them to work in one or incarceratedby the courts Africanpursuant American to an Alternative and Latina to women, Incarceration including more of the program’s businesses, which include their children, and for up to 12 months for women referred restaurants, cafes, moving businesses, furniture the formerly incarcerated population include the Fortune making and bookstores. Facilities exist in San Academyprogram. andThose the that Delancey offer Streettheir services Foundation more . Abroadly few, like to the Fortune Academy, have successfully incorporated more than and North Carolina. Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City, New Mexico one type of housing in a congregate facility (emergency »» Volunteers of America’s Project Oasis, based in and phased permanent). Below is a brief mention of models Newark, NJ, operates three community residences where the formerly incarcerated residents are

that have generated interest in the reentry field: employment training program, after which they are requiredassisted in to obtaining complete independentan 18-month housinglife skills and and jobs. 3 A summary description of various supportive housing »» programs,for Previously organized Incarcerated on a state-by-state People.” Another level, resource can be found is Policy in Black, K. & Cho, R. (2004), “New Beginnings: The Need for Supportive Housing located in Brooklyn, New York, has served women Sinceinvolved 1844, in thethe criminalWomen’s justice Prison system. Association WPA (WPA), has PrisonersStatement to 19 the of theCommunity” Council of ( Statewww.reentrypolicy.org/Report/TO Government’s 2005 “Report of Cthe). Re-Entry Policy Council: Charting the Safe and Successful Return of

4 three housing programs: the Hopper Home, an Alternative to Incarceration program providing tothreaten as the “Nottheir in safety My Backyard” and/or adversely or “NIMBY” affect Syndrome. neighborhood Givenamenity that (Dear, one’s 1992). home representsIn common safety,language, it is this no surprise is referred thetransitional Sarah Powell housing Huntington (from 8 to House, 12 months) a transitional to up that strong protectionist emotions and concerns will to 20 women under court-mandated supervision; surface in opposition to any perceived threat to that safety homeless and formerly incarcerated women seeking housing residence (from 6 to 18 months) for NIMBY reactions are greater when the local stakeholders (Whitelack participation & Ashton, 1992).in the proposedResearch demonstratesproject, lack accurate that to reunite with their children; and a self-governing information about the clients and/or the problems they Newprogram York. that provides permanent housing for 8 women in a two-family row house in Brooklyn, »» Community Partners in Action, located in Hartford, face,proposed and fear development for their safety is a residential (Dear, 1992; facility Wynne-Edwards, for people Connecticut, runs several supportive housing 2003).with criminal These fears records are ordramatically other troubled heightened and/or sociallywhen the stigmatized individuals (e.g., recovering drug addicts, programs throughout Connecticut; these include mentally ill individuals, people with HIV/AIDS — all of whom are represented in the population of people with housinga 33-bed program transitional funded housing by the facility local Departmentfor men on of Correctionsparole or probation for men andreleased a 28-bed from transitional DOC facilities. In a study of seven communities which had experienced »» Span Transitional Housing in Boston, Massachusetts, criminal records) (Dear, 1992; Wynne-Edwards, 2003). the siting or attempted siting of residences for the formerly provides transitional scattered site SRO housing and comprehensive case management services that the community members expressed understanding of to previously incarcerated persons living with incarcerated,the importance researchers of housing Doble and rehabilitation and Lindsay (2003)services found for HIV/AIDS. the formerly incarcerated, but nonetheless felt an overriding »» Pioneer Human Services, located in Seattle, concern for their safety in being near such a facility and

organization that integrates housing with residents. These fears typically escalated in accordance Washington, is an entrepreneurial nonprofit withexpressed the size “pure, of the unrequited facility and fear” number about of the residents proposed to be case management services, and training and served, the seriousness of the potential residents’ criminal rehabilitationself-supporting services businesses, to over comprehensive 5,000 clients a histories, and the likelihood that the facility’s neighbors year. Most clients have histories of incarceration, would encounter the residents in public spaces and on homelessness and/or substance abuse. It operates various programs throughout the fear were elevated when the neighbors were unfamiliar State of Washington. public transportation (Doble & Lindsay, 2003). Levels of

»» Oxford House, based in Silver Springs, Maryland, is with the organization proposing the program (Doble & an umbrella organization that provides resources Lindsay,of social 2003).service An programs additional in theirexacerbating neighborhood factor (Dear,is when and training to men and women recovering from the community feels exploited by an unequal distribution drug and alcohol abuse (some of whom have 1992;NIMBY Wynne-Edwards, opposition – 2003; which Doble can take & Lindsay, the form 2003). of protests, homesincarceration located histories) in stable neighborhoods.to create a network Each of home drug- and alcohol-free self-governing and self-supporting demonstrations, petition-writing, appeals to politicians and, in some cases, court-room battles – can shut down may have from 6 to 15 residents. Oxford Houses projects or significantly delay them, adding huge costs, or Organizations contemplating providing supportive now exist in 41 states, Canada and Australia. Strongso sour NIMBY the community-facility opposition can also relations endanger that obtaining eventual client housing to the formerly incarcerated must not only be well-beingfunds or the and continuity program of success funding are streams negatively for the affected. program prepared to meet the challenge of raising the funds – or starting businesses – to support their programs, but must just as importantly be prepared to cope with and respond to (Dear,But 1992). there Such is also is athe positive potential side dark to NIMBY. side of ResearchNIMBY. the groundswell of heated opposition that may be expected and case studies on the siting of supportive housing to arise from the host community. programs for the homeless and/or formerly incarcerated, while limited in number, nonetheless consistently furnish “Not In My Backyard”: strong evidence that meaningfully engaging the community goes a long way toward gaining its acceptance. Such The Problem of Siting Supportive Housing engagement may comprise actions such as involving local stakeholders in the siting process, genuinely addressing of a neighborhood attempt to protect against unwelcome their concerns and fears, providing means for them to developments,“Siting” or “locational” fearing that conflicts they will occur lower when property residents values,

develop confidence in the program’s safety and effectiveness 5 and trust in the provider organization, and educating them that the organization was losing too many clients to the streets and prisons due to lack of housing. Without safe and stable housing upon leaving prison, clients could not about the clients and the benefits of supportive housing, likely gain the traction necessary to rebuild their lives. both to the clients and the community (Iglesias, 2002; Taking on the challenges of growing the organization InHart addition, Shegos, a 2006;meaningful Wynne-Edwards, engagement 2003; with Reportthe local of the Re-Entrystakeholders Policy has Council, the potential 2003; Dobleto improve & Lindsay, a supportive 2003). housing, Fortune decided to establish the Fortune Academy housing program and strengthen the host community. from a non-housing provider to an agency that provides permanent” supportive housing to homeless formerly Summary incarceratedprogram to provide people, emergency regardless short-termof their criminal and “phased- history. between transitional and permanent housing by providing “Phased-permanent”housing that is “permanent housing for bridges this phase the traditional of the person’s gap to respondTo recap, to community-basedan overwhelming needservice for providers supportive working life,” with the expectation that the person will move on housing,in the reentry despite field a lack throughout of resources. the U.S. Given have the begun enormous to independent housing in the community when ready – need for supportive reentry housing – and the limited usually in a year or more – but will have continued access to resources available – sharing among service providers of Fortune’s supportive services and the opportunity to return best practices and lessons learned is critical. This toolkit to the Academy in the future if s/he experiences a crisis highlights the experience of The Fortune Society in its that would otherwise result in a return to homelessness. Despite obstacles in funding and heated resistance from neighborhood in West Harlem, New York City. In addition the area residents, the Fortune Academy opened its developmentto the many other of a housing challenges project associated in a tight-knit with becoming residential doors in April 2002 with the support of the community. a provider of supportive reentry housing, The Fortune

Fortune’s first step in this growth process was to Societyincarcerated experienced men and fierce women, neighborhood some of whom opposition, with a history i.e., “NIMBY”, to the siting of their 62-bed facility for formerly completepurpose was the tomulti-year articulate organizational a vision for the strategic organization’s planning effort that it had commenced in 1996. That effort’s ultimate be learned from the Fortune story is that of how it engaged future and design a blueprint to ensure it would have withof violent the community offenses. Amongin such the a way other that important strong opposition lessons to was transformed to robust support and admiration. challenges in growing the organization. Working with the necessary internal capacity to meet the significant the important issues necessary for its growth: leadership, managementtwo organizational and trust. psychologists, The organization Fortune emerged first tackled with a II: A Case Study stronger culture and management structure. To address the unmet needs of its homeless clients, the organization Fortune Society Decides to Add Reentry Supportive Housing piece of which was to raise funds for the purchase and developmentthen produced of an a piece ambitious of property five-year for plan,use as the a congregatecentral supportive housing facility. Notably, there was not The Fortune Society is a New York City nonprofit incarcerated women and men – and those at risk of the additional task of providing supportive housing: organizationincarceration that, – the since skills 1967, and serviceshas been they providing need to formerly break the unanimous support among Fortune staff for taking on cycle of crime and incarceration. Fortune had experienced such housing, were concerned about funding, lack of communitysome staff support,members, and while diverting committed attention to the away need fromfor the services. A holistic approach, it includes substance abuse important services Fortune was already providing to the successes with its “one-stop” model for providing reentry treatment, HIV/AIDS treatment and other health services, formerly incarcerated and those at risk of incarceration. alternatives to incarceration programs, educational and vocational training, anger management and life skills Mindful of these concerns and of the fact that a training, and counseling. In the course of a strategic supportive housing facility would be both a business and 4 Fortune Academy was an all encompassing one. It included: planningThe process Fortune begun Society’s in mission 1996, Fortunestatement realized,expresses its however, social services venture, Fortune’s five-year plan to open the philosophy about the transformational potential of human beings: “The »» A sober assessment of the level of manageable Fortune4 Society believes in a world where all who are at-risk, incarcerated or formerly incarcerated can become positive, contributing members of society. what funds could be put at risk to purchase Our work supports successful reentry of formerly incarcerated men and financial risk to the organization, i.e., determining women and promotes alternatives to incarceration, thus strengthening the fabric of our communities. We do this by: believing in the power of individuals »» Developing an exit strategy to keep the organization to change, building lives through service programs shaped by the needs and property and how large a mortgage it could handle; experiences of our clients, [and] changing minds through education and solvent and its reputation intact if the plan for advocacy to promote the creation of a fair, humane and truly rehabilitative correctional system.” l supportive housing failed; http://fortunesociety.org/01_about/mission.htm 6 The Castle With an established budget for purchase of a property

Fortune began the search for a suitable housing facility, mindfuland partners of factors in place such (finance, as zoning legal for and group architectural), living, ease of

more than 20 possible locations all over Manhattan, Fortune transportation, and affordability. In 1998, having visited

Harlem.purchased The “the Castle Castle,” had beena once abandoned magnificent for neo-Gothic more than 20 years,building was located in a state at 140th of ruin Street and wasand Riversidehost to illicit Drive drug in Westuse

millions of dollars to renovate – for which a capital drive wouldand sales. be needed But, it was – the affordable, building had and great while potential it would and take came with an adjacent empty lot that would ultimately give Fortune options for future growth. The Castle was zoned for use as congregate housing and, importantly for future clients, easily accessible by public transit from any area of the city. It was situated in the predominantly

Heights,” a primarily residential area within West Harlem. TheLatino neighborhood and African-American immediately neighborhood surrounding of the “Hamilton Castle had

families (as measured by reference to national median householda significant income portion ranges), of lower-middle in contrast and to theworking prevalence class of lower household income areas in West Harlem generally.

»» Ongoing recruiting for The Fortune Society Board politically well organized and had previously clashed with The surrounding neighborhood was tight-knit, of Directors to incorporate expertise in areas such city planners over the unwelcome placement of a sewage as real estate, project capital management and treatment plant along the Hudson River right across from the Castle. The sewage treatment plant had been originally planned for construction in a predominantly »» financialStrategically planning; securing a blend of public funds to placement in Hamilton Heights, without involvement Fortune’s decisions about which clients to serve and whiteof West and Harlem’s affluent advisory neighborhood Community of Manhattan, Board or andinput its finance the project that would not interfere with from the community, had left residents feeling bitter and abused. Another pertinent piece of the neighborhood’s »» what programs and types of housing to offer; partners with appropriate experience and history was the lingering anger about what it perceived Hiring legal, architectural and co-developer programs in West Harlem, many of them placed there by »» Developingoutstanding detailed reputations; operational and program wasthe State an over-saturation of New York without and “dumping” community of social involvement, service details, including intake and screening procedures, and many of which had closed their doors once state funding streams ended, leaving the clients behind to security needs and operating budgets for the fend for themselves. Knowing this history, and aware services to be offered, staffing requirements, of generally negative attitudes toward the homeless »» and those with criminal records, Fortune expected a Academy; high degree of neighborhood hostility and resistance. Looking ahead to long-term funding possibilities to »» Visitingsustain theexisting Academy supportive program housing over time; facilities to GainingCommunity community Outreach acceptance and could Response be very difficult. witness first-hand the way they worked and their The Castle site had two advantages: because Fortune »» Selecting a suitable location for a congregate power to transform lives; purchased the property with it own funds, no city or community level approval was needed for the organization »» Planningsupportive a comprehensivehousing facility, community and; outreach group living, Fortune did not need to seek a zoning variance. Fortuneto move in;could and, have because ignored the the site host was neighborhood already zoned and for effort.

7 proceeded “as of right” with its renovation and supportive members of the community who advise elected housing program plans. However, the organization wanted its Fortune Academy program to be a part of the community “for the long haul” and appreciated that success would in officialstwo committees and government of the local agencies Community on matters Board, the affecting the social welfare of the community); of the program and trust in The Fortune Society as an significant part depend on the neighborhood’s acceptance Committee on Housing, Land Use and Zoning and comprehensive outreach strategy. On the one hand, they the Committee on Uniformed Services; members of collaboratedorganization. with Fortune the community,therefore prepared following a two-pronged the principles Friendsthe tenant’s of Riverbank association State for Parkthe next-door organization. neighbor; of respect, transparency, accountability, accessibility and the Council for the 30th Police Precinct; and the “being a good neighbor” and, on the other hand, remained clients, as well as Board Members, identifying who Fortunecould be surveyedmobilized its to current assist with and theformer outreach, staff and housing to formerly incarcerated persons without strategically taking advantage of prior relationships firmdiscrimination about their based mission on tocriminal provide histories. phased permanentThe strategy of trust and connections to local leaders. also took into account practical concerns of marshalling and »» Hiring a Community Liaison: Fortune also decided early on to hire a community liaison and chose for that key role a former employee who had long lived allocatingthe physical the and necessary emotional resources stamina for needed the outreach to endure effort what in Harlem. He was a trusted pillar of the community (e.g.,could time, likely staff, be a protractedfinances, and and consultants) volatile process. and bracing Because for programs for the formerly incarcerated. He was also and had significant experience with support the renovation would take years to complete and finance – a great presenter and patient listener. A formerly itself a challenging and time-consuming process that would occur simultaneously – Fortune had the benefit of time. him at local stakeholders’ meetings. Between the incarcerated Fortune staff member accompanied The Academy was not scheduled to open for five years. two of them, the public faces of the community to work collaboratively with the community on gaining engagement campaign had both legitimacy and acceptance:The outreach strategy included taking specific steps authenticity. »» Hiring a Public Relations Consultant: To assist in »» One-on-One Relationship Building by planning the community outreach, Fortune hired a Organization’s Leaders: Another early decision public relations consultant. The consultant stressed was to have the CEO of Fortune, JoAnne Page, the importance of being transparent, addressing supported as needed by the current board chair, people’s concerns and issues immediately, Roland Nicholson, attend every community meeting maintaining a steady presence all of the time, and likely to be ”hot and volatile” or at which detailed helping make the community safer. to approaching the local stakeholders at public »» Reaching Out to Elected Officials: Before questionsmeetings, aboutJoAnne the and project other wouldteam members be asked. engaged Prior directly engaging with the community, Fortune sought the early support and advice of its elected from groups that were likely to be supportive (and whoin a series could ofthen one-on-one act as ambassadors), meetings with as wellindividuals as with with Fortune or knew of its work by reputation. officials, many of whom had a prior relationship opposed. As JoAnne explained, those key, influential persons likely to be the most The elected officials provided advice, but kept We elected to do a person-by-person astakeholders, low profile, notboth wanting those who to get could out helpahead build of a campaign. We started with the influential theirsupport constituents. base and those They who identified would community oppose them. people. It was about building a bucketful They predicted that the stakeholders would raise of individual relationships. We gave out our phone numbers, even our home phone of social service programs in West Harlem and numbers. I took people [out] for lunch. We athat “fairness” the immediate concern neighbors about the toover-saturation the Castle – the saw what people cared about and we responded. We had very personal contacts. One community board member interviewed noted doorpolitically – would active, present middle-class, the strongest predominantly opposition, due this strategy and commented on its success in African-Americanto their proximity residentsto the Castle. of a large building next building support for the project, saying, »» Identifying Community Stakeholders: Based JoAnne Page was strategic in first going to upon advice sought and their own research, Fortune individuals and small groups of people to generate support. She saw the [Community included: the Executive Committee of the local Board] Chairs first. Then she moved to the Communityidentified the Board key local (which stakeholders. consists of Theseappointed executive committee, and then she went to

8 bigger groups. In this way, by going from “These people are coming key individuals to groups, she obtained a growing consensus. home. So, are they going »» Balancing Client Needs With Giving Voice to to come home to some Community Concerns: Mindful of the diversity in kind of hope or are they of outreach, Fortune adopted a variegated process coming home to despair?” anythat, community above all, allowed and the the need local for stakeholdersdifferent styles We explained that we help people coming their concerns and feel heard and valued. Fortune out of jail who have turned their lives variedfrequent both and the meaningful format and opportunities location of community to voice around and need a support system to outreach – from private meetings with individuals reintegrate into society and not hurt anyone at neutral places, to small and large local meetings and help themselves. Fortune Society gives on the stakeholders’ home turfs, to meetings held people who’ve been away many years the at the Castle as it was being renovated and at other opportunity to change their lives…. Fortune facilities, to attendance at neighborhood »» Taking the Heat and Making Concessions events. Whatever the outreach format, the Fortune Without Jeopardizing Essential Client Needs: As team aimed to strike a certain balance: They were expected, however, the area residents’ reaction, for determined to be accessible, respectful of local stakeholders’ concerns, and accountable to the host For over a year, meetings were contentious and community, while remaining committed to their quite some time, was one of fear, shock and outrage. threats of taking measures to stop Fortune from to provide emergency and phased permanent openingmarked bythe shouting, Academy. shutting Some opponents off microphones, actually didand goalsupportive of transforming housing to the homeless, Castle into formerly a 62-bed facility circulate a petition to stop the project. The biggest incarcerated individuals (including those convicted fear concerned the clients themselves, given that of serious crimes.) By way of example, when sharing with the facility and the clients would share public spaces andthe Academytransportation would withnot in neighborhood any manner be residents. a lock-up date information about what they planned to do Neighbors accused Fortune of wanting to bring (re:community renovations stakeholders and the design accurate of the and Academy up-to- “hardened criminals” to their neighborhood who program), the Fortune team was also implicitly would be free to roam and steal from, assault or communicating its determination to go forward. rape them. The neighbors expressed concerns about There was, moreover, never any attempt to soft the high needs of certain formerly incarcerated pedal the fact that the Fortune Academy would not persons, such as those with chronic mental illness. There was immense concern about bringing sex

excludelocal stakeholder people convicted groups howof drug-related, supportive housingviolent or Fortune remained adamant in its commitment forsex-related people returning crimes. Fortune’s home from liaison jail and articulated prison to offenders into the neighborhood. not to discriminate on the basis of criminal or would promote public safety, the very goal the medical/psychiatric history, but also reassured community desired. the local stakeholders that persons who posed a The Fortune team also provided information and current threat of violence or who would otherwise statistics to debunk stereotypes and myths about endanger the community would not be admitted the formerly incarcerated and nuanced information to or allowed to remain at the Academy. Fortune about the risks of recidivism. Through such carefully explained its screening process and security measures, assuring the area residents that community safety would be a foremost criterion education and awareness-raising, Fortune sought realityto re-characterize that community the discussion safety is best from assured one about basis. The community was made aware of the strict whenspeculative people fear return of crime home waves from jailto the and fact-driven prison to houseand that rules decisions and code would of conduct be made that on residentsa case-by-case at the supervised supportive housing, rather than living without support on the streets. Fortune made the decision to service them, but, Academyin a concession would to have the tolocal follow. stakeholders’ As for sex strongoffenders, Fortune’s liaison recalled how he explained at concerns, agreed not to accept at the Castle level community meetings the central feature of the organization’s mission, giving hope and opportunity to those returning home: threesolely sexon theoffenders, type of crimei.e., those they personshad committed, deemed but,by a court to pose a high risk of re-offending, not based

rather on individual factors unique to those persons. 9 The level of community heat on this issue was such attends those meetings each month.) Knowing that Fortune could not jeopardize the entire project. specifically who to contact to express concerns was, and remains, very important to the community. The community also expressed its deep frustration Many local stakeholders interviewed expressed that West Harlem was already and had long been One Community Board member said: agencies, all of whom promised great things, but their appreciation of this level of outreach effort. over-burdenedmany of whom provedand saturated not to be with accountable social service when [Fortune] came up against a community things went wrong. Fortune’s response to this who didn’t know them and was distrustful concern was nuanced. Fortune understood the of them and of the work they did, and it was many subtext issues inherent in this frustration: the mostly distrustful of the population they served. What [Fortune] promised was they legitimate concerns, based on past bad experiences, would be regular visitors to the Community local stakeholders’ feelings of powerlessness; the Board, so that anytime anything happened they would be there to address it. [The wouldabout agencybe another competency, agency that financial would stewardship temporarily liaison] came to every single community invadeand accountability; the neighborhood, and the never concerns intending that Fortuneto meeting every single month and sat in the become part of the fabric of the neighborhood. In back to respond…. I’ve never seen anyone short, they were concerned that Fortune would not be follow through like [he] followed through…. a good neighbor. Through [his] work and consistency … the wariness sort of whittled away. »» Being a Good Neighbor and Responding Promptly to Community Concerns: To »» Honoring the Architectural Heritage of the demonstrate that it was determined to be a good Castle: Fortune applied for and received listing of neighbor, Fortune used deeds, not words, and the Castle on the National Historic Register and committed itself to restore the Castle as nearly as When Fortune learned that the holdover tenant onit responded its back lot quickly was conducting to community an extensive concerns. drug possiblethe area toresidents, its original as it neo-Gothic made the Castle grandeur. once This again lot, Fortune moved to evict him and got the police aunsolicited source of neighborhoodmove proved to pride. be quite Fortune’s meaningful architect, to trafficking business under the guise of a parking trespassers were engaged in drug dealing and use andto patrol prostitution the area inside more theoften. Castle, Upon it learning boarded that up a partner at a well-known and respected architect the building, fenced in the property and hired a firm,shared had that his with staff the research area residents. the rich Fortunearchitectural historyalso agreed of the to Castle make theand, Castle at Fortune’s a resource request, for the keep trespassers out. When a neighbor complained community, allowing groups to hold their meetings ofprivate the noxious security odors firm emanating to patrol the from premises garbage and that there. In another concession to the host community had accumulated over the years, Fortune cleared and signal of its intent to be a good neighbor, all of it away. Noise complaints were handled with Fortune agreed to give priority to formerly similar expediency. To increase safety, Fortune incarcerated men and women from Harlem. »» Creating a Community Advisory Board: To over 20 years, the Castle had an owner who dutifully added lights to the property. For the first time in create a sense of shared ownership in the project and further integrate itself into the community, front of and alongside the Castle. Fortune made the cleared the ice and snow off of the sidewalk in Fortune created a Community Advisory Board early in the process. They invited as members opened its doors to any residents. Castle cleaner and safer; and it did so years before it elected representatives, Community Board »» Building Trust in the Agency: To demonstrate leadership, and neighbors, including opponents transparency and the competence to run the of the project. Fortune used its Advisory Board to proposed Academy program, the Fortune team share information on the proposed renovations invited its opponents to tour its other facilities, and program design, listen to the area residents’ concerns, and solicit input from the Board members, Fortune’s other neighbors. To show accessibility and honoring their local experience and knowledge. As thatspeak it towould staff be and accountable clients, and should even anyquestion problems Fortune’s community liaison put it, an organization arise, Fortune’s community liaison attended six must “use the community’s wisdom,” adding, “What local stakeholder meetings every single month, they say is very close to them. Treat their concerns whether or not the Academy was on the agenda, as very seriously.” According to an advisory board well as special neighborhood events, from the time member interviewed, the impact of all this was to make the local stakeholders feel valued: of the Fortune Academy in 2002. (The liaison still of purchase of the building in 1998 to the opening

10 “People need to be valued not deliberately seek media attention, although he and when you show them continued to receive services at Fortune’s main service site in downtown Manhattan. In the process, Fortune gained that you value their thoughts, valuable experience in handling intensive media attention ideas and talents, you will and learned two important things about community relations. One, the demonstrators were not opposed to the have a lasting relationship supportive housing program at the Castle, but, rather, they with them.” People co-create your project when they were protesting the client specifically. Second, Fortune are on your Community Advisory Board. community.realized that This it had population not adequately was less targeted integrated its outreach into the Community based organizations create establishedto stakeholders political from structure the Latino, of including West Harlem. the Dominican, Fortune advisory boards all the time, but all they do learned that in identifying stakeholders, it must be careful to is a dog-and-pony show on a quarterly basis identify and reach out to those who may be disenfranchised or so, and there is little real interaction…. Fortune Society had all of the “in between” this and continues its work of relationship building. interactions. They allowed real community or less politically engaged. It acted quickly to correct interaction on the advisory board. The Legacy of the Fortune Academy Project »» Perseverance in Relationship Building and Learning From Mistakes: It took time, but by the the Castle in 2002, there have been no challenges to its time the Castle opened its doors in 2002, there was presenceSince therethe the or first the wayFortune the program Academy is clients run. There moved have into a great deal of community acceptance. The local been no complaints about client behavior, and no safety stakeholders interviewed felt that a partnership had issues have surfaced. The Fortune Society has kept its evolved between Fortune and the community. They promise of running a safe congregate supportive housing attributed that evolution to Fortune’s transparency, facility. It continues its organizational culture of being responsiveness to their concerns, evident passion a good neighbor (e.g., the community liaison continues through. As one local stakeholder summarized it: for its mission, and constant presence and follow- The way that things changed was that annualto attend Halloween six local stakeholder“haunted castle” meetings parties per and month; backyard the [Fortune] became very engaged in the Castlehealth isfairs open are to held community for the area groups residents). for meetings; That same and community.... [JoAnne Page] slowly “good neighbor” culture is passed on to the clients, who explained her ideas and plans over time are expected to be friendly and courteous with neighbors to us. She addressed the concerns that we and take ownership and pride in the care of neighborhood had. She fully engaged with the most vocal organization in opposition…[and] kept the noted, “What’s so great about them is that Fortune Society community apprised at all times…. She isproperty. pretty low The key. 30th We precinct don’t hear police from officers The Fortune interviewed Society.” appointed the right community liaisons to Many community members interviewed likewise measured different organizations…. What JoAnne said, success in part by how little they notice that there is a she meant…. JoAnne was always there. And, supportive housing project in their neighborhood and how in doing all these above things, she gained a “no impact is good impact.” One neighbor put it this way: lot of credibility and credible capital…. In a real and palpable sense JoAnne very deftly made the community and everyone involved a partner of hers in obtaining The Castle. An important test of community acceptance of the Academy, and a learning moment for Fortune, occurred after the Castle opened. A client who

conviction came to live at the Academy. Once the hadnews served leaked time to the for press, a high immediately profile child there murder were demonstrations and reporters day and night in front

his arrival. Many of the protestors were from the of the Castle, and news helicopters overhead filming West Harlem. This client stayed in the Castle for two Dominicanweeks until community, Fortune asked the himlargest to leave Latino for group violating in

the requirement that he 11 Considering what the program is, it is a success that The greatest turnaround occurred among those who most it can be just a new neighbor. There are no new crime feared that their vulnerable community would be hurt by incidences, no loitering, people don’t feel they can’t the presence of the Academy at the Castle. These individuals walk by the Castle and there are not a lot of problems eventually became the Academy’s greatest supporters. One spilling out from the Castle and onto the community. Castle neighbor, who had never expected that the Fortune The Castle is open and it is a settled part of the Academy would gain community acceptance, saw that community. It is a good neighbor. “there was …a complete turnaround, [from] we don’t want these horrible people here to we can be neighbors and we Others interviewed expressed their appreciation can work together.” This same individual describes the that with the Fortune Academy at the Castle the Academy’s clients as neighborhood is now safer and more beautiful. And, the …men and women looking for an opportunity to learn far the area residents and Fortune have come in working from the past and move forward as human beings. togethersubsequent as partnersdevelopment to strengthen of the adjacent their lotcommunity. shows how This is a place where we can really look and see the When Fortune discussed with its Community Advisory result of the impact on a population that we are Board its plans to develop the lot to add permanent really fearful about. supportive housing apartments and service facilities Given this evolved appreciation and understanding for its clients, the advisory board members raised the of the Fortune Academy program, it is no surprise that community members have come to solicit the services of issue of the enormous need for affordable housing for the Academy for family or friends returning home from incarceration, giving to the Academy a strong stamp of low-incomein its plans to members develop ofthe the lot. neighborhood. The Castle Gardens, In response, open Fortune added affordable housing for the community approval. membersin 2010, is of a mixedthe local used community. residential Acknowledging building that will these reservesteps forward, 50 of its one 114 advisory units as board affordable member housing stated: for III: What Does the Fortune [The Castle] used to be a crack den…. It is now a Academy Story Tell Us? beautifully renovated building and the vacant lot behind it is now a beautiful building with housing The proposal to create supportive housing for formerly for people in the neighborhood. It is a wonderfully incarcerated individuals in a West Harlem residential positive change…. neighborhood was initially met, not surprisingly, with intense anger and fear. And yet, community resistance began “There were people in the neighborhood who felt the addition into placeturn into by The acceptance Fortune evenSociety’s before leadership the first fromclients the arrived very of formerly incarcerated people atbeginning the Castle, of thethe project.result of Today, the community eight years outreach after the effort opening put into the community was going to of the Fortune Academy at the Castle, The Fortune Society is make the community less safe, but viewed as an important partner in making the surrounding the truth is that its presence has communitymembers at saferits new and housing stronger. facility, This isCastle reflected Gardens. in Fortune’s made the community more safe.” decision to incorporate affordable housing for community What were the critical factors that contributed to The Another important legacy is that the area residents Fortune Society’s success in gaining community acceptance themselves have undergone transformation in various for the Fortune Academy? What does it suggest to other organizations considering similar supportive housing of the early opposition to the Fortune Academy was that programs in their communities, especially those serving ways. One person observed that a beneficial byproduct cooperative relationships emerged among community homeless formerly incarcerated individuals? groups that had not previously worked together. According to local stakeholders interviewed, the process of community One place to look for critical success factors is in engagement with Fortune also set for them a high, but achievable, standard for how other social services providers operations in established neighborhoods. White and Ashton the research field on “siting” or locating social“the by-product service good working relationships with host communities. Other in a democratic society of the on-going tension between neighborhoodand community-based residents organizations learned from could the experience seek to establish how (1992)[individual] characterize freedom oflocation choice conflictsand the potential as infringement to be better advocates for their needs and expressed that of the rights of others that such freedom entails.” Those who they now enjoyed “a stronger bond with local politicians.” “a constant struggle to balance Another important transformation was in how area individualstudy location liberty conflicts and collective in the context responsibility of supportive in terms housing of residents changed their views on the formerly incarcerated. describe the conflict as

12 public housing and sheltering supports and services” »» identifying the key stakeholders (i.e., all individuals and groups who see themselves as a part of the leadership to achieve community acceptance for the(Wynne- Fortune system and who believe they will be impacted by the Edwards, 2003). The approach taken by The Fortune Society change

Academy is a clear example of state-of-the-art practices for »» working); with these stakeholders, honoring their resolvingThe literature siting conflicts. on overcoming NIMBY – or resolving siting disputes – provides guidelines for understanding and »» “educating”reactions and stakeholder responding by to being their honest needs; and working to overcome community resistance (Allen, 2007; »» creatingtransparent and aboutparticipating the nature in opportunities of the change; for CommunityDear, 1992; Iglesias,Acceptance 2002; Strategies Iglesias, ConsortiumNguyen & Amoroso, (CASC) in ongoing input from and dialogue with stakeholders, 2000.) Guidelines taken from two different sources – The Northern California (NPH) and Michael Dear, a leading partnership with the Non-Profit Housing Association of »» including those most resistant to the change; and the stakeholders and for the systems as a whole. Fortune Society leadership. The CASC and NPH approach is identifying benefits that the change may have for scholar in the field – describe the actions taken by The Fortune applied each of these principles as they with internal planning meetings by the organization approached the community to gain acceptance for the a six-step strategy for community acceptance that begins Fortune Academy. For example, they chose as one of their three main “ambassadors” a highly respected Harlem developerthat include faces: self-assessment government, and supporters, result in strategiesconcerned and resident who knew the community (i.e., “system”) as an outreachneighbors/potential plans for the opponents, five critical the audiences media and a projectthe the community of the future transformation of the Castle. insider and who was believable when describing benefits to courts (CASC, 2000.) Dear (1992) describes a five-step potential clients of the Academy are neighborhood residents collaborative community-based strategy that includes: Hewho also will was be “returningeffective at home.” reminding the community that many broad public education; community outreach; creating a Community Advisory Board; concessions and incentives to the community;While these andstrategies post-entry may communicationseem rather straightforward strategies. resolution also help to explain the success of the Fortune in text, implementing them successfully can be challenging. Concepts from the field of conflict and its constructive To understand why the Fortune Academy was ultimately literature is collaboration embraced by the community, it may be helpful to place the Academy.work together A powerful to identify concept a resolution in the conflict that meets resolution both of strategies and guidelines in the context of constructs and : i.e., when two parties in a conflict

their needs (Deutsch, 2006; Kihlmann, R.H.,positions and Thomas, (i.e. “what” modelspractices. from the social science fields of systems change, K.W., 1977.) For collaboration to be successful, the parties constructive conflict resolution, and effective leadership needsmust notand simply interests negotiate their different Thinking of a community as a “system,” and viewing the collaborativethey want); they approach, must instead The Fortune identify Society their underlying leadership siting of an outreach program through the lens of systems never avoided (i.e., “why” they want it.) Using a change, highlights the fact that the introduction of such a opponents to the Academy) and never sought to dominate program will likely impact the neighborhood in ways both when its positions conflicts were (e.g., at odds it never with ignored those expressed the fiercest by the planned and unplanned. Generally, community residents community. Even though Fortune had the legal right and fear that the siting of what they view as an undesirable power to place its housing program at the Castle, it chose to outreach program will have a negative impact on their addition, rather than reacting to the overtly stated positions Service providers focus instead on the positive impacts that engage with the opposition and seek “win-win” solutions. In community and affect their comfort, stability and safety. of the various stakeholder groups, Fortune’s leadership worked tirelessly to gain insight into the underlying needs and on society indirectly. Systems thinking recognizes that of the various constituencies so that they could then jointly inthe a services“system” they all parts offer impact will have one onanother their clients and the directly whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Therefore, introducing a social services program into a residential neighborhood find ways of meeting those needs (Fisher & Ury, 1981). will have impacts beyond those that the service provider was the way that Fortune handled the intense community envisions. As experts on their neighborhood, community A clear example of this conflict resolution approach members can help the service provider create a more Most community stakeholders took the position that sex heat about its decision to accept sex offenders asunder clients. any alienated by the project. As a result, service providers circumstances effective program, as long as they buy-in and are not offendersand their lack should of knowledge not be housed of the at distinctionsthe Academy among them systems change (Burke, 2002): . Recognizing neighbors’ fear of sex offenders should be mindful of the following principles of effective the Fortune leadership responded by making a concession and how those distinctions relate to risk of re-offending,

to not house “level three” sex offenders, those deemed 13 strong commitment to community safety, a clear “need” and to embark on a challenging new initiative, like supportive mostpriority at riskamong of re-offending. its neighbors. TheyIn addition, also reiterated they explained their housing?What While should it an may organization be tempting do for first organization to prepare itself leaders to “dive in” and begin to plan for the initiative, it is extremely useful – and maybe even necessary – to their client selection process; educated the community begin with an assessment of the organization’s current on recidivism statistics corresponding to different types state. Taking on an inherently ambitious project that is ofmembers sex offenders; who sometimes and agreed visited to keep the Castleclients (e.g.,with duringsex the also likely to attract much community opposition will offenseannual Halloween convictions haunted away from castle children neighborhood and community event.) put stresses on an organization, revealing gaps in its knowledge or capacity. Questions about the current Finally, the Fortune Academy’s leadership team behaved leadership model, the competency levels of organization consistently with the leadership principles of successful change agents. Models of positive organization leadership and prospects, and the state of client services should all stress the importance of having a clear vision of the future membersbe addressed. in key As skill a result areas, of thethis agency’s assessment, financial it may health well be as well as the ability to lead the organization through the the organizational capacities that are determined to be necessary to launch a “Phase 1” planning process to develop CEOchanges and requiredBoard led to by meet creating that futureand conveying (Goleman, a clear Boyatzis and & McKee, 2002; Whetten & Cameron, 2005). Fortune’s organization leaders can turn their attention to Phase 2. compelling vision for the project, while staying open less than optimal. After this Phase 1 effort is underway, to input from others about ways of implementing the of the proposed project and compare them against the housing for community members in the plans for Castle currentIn Phase and/or 2, leadersemerging specifically organizational assess capabilities. the requirements Gardens.vision. This The is inclusion evident in was the suggested decision to by include neighborhood affordable members and would not have been a part of the project and expertise, and necessary knowledge and skills for otherwise. Also, Fortune’s leadership led the organization Staffingthe new andinitiative organizational should all structure, be considered. financial Once robustness the through internal changes necessary to grow as an organization and become a housing provider, and they demonstrated the courage and determination to see the (Phaseorganizational 2), the decision capabilities about have whether been addressedor not to embark (Phase on 1) project through to successful completion. Community andthe projectrequirements can be made.of the initiative have been fully identified members commented on the unwavering persistence Another factor to consider in making the commitment and commitment that the Fortune leadership exhibited, to an ambitious new project is its relevance to the attending meeting after meeting, and always making organization’s mission. A project that is viewed as well the time to listen to one more concern or complaint. aligned with the organization’s mission has obvious advantages. For example, Fortune determined that for a portion of its clients – those who are homeless upon leaving IV: Best Practices for Gaining prison – the scarcity of available supportive housing undermines and seriously impedes their successful reentry. Community Support: Applying While the Fortune Academy would be able to meet only a Lessons Learned to Your small fraction of the need for such housing in New York City, Fortune’s leadership hoped that its existence might Community serve as a model for others, and, perhaps, help to bring down some barriers to supportive housing in the future. some best practices for gaining community acceptance for a supportiveUsing Fortune’s housing project.experience as an example, below are aboutEven the withprospect the best of launching preparation a challenging and systemic project self- like Organizational Readiness: reflection,supportive some housing. organization They may members not be eager may or be willing hesitant to Deciding to Make the Commitment about the priority, timing or desirability of the project. Itembrace is important the necessary for organization changes; leaders they may to acknowledgehave doubts housing for the formerly incarcerated in a neighborhood the doubts of organization members at the same time Launching an unpopular project like supportive and the organizational capacity for success. In the case that opposes it takes both intensive effort and sustained that they confirm their belief in the project’s benefits commitment;literature (e.g., it CASC, resembles 2000), an as organizational well as The Fortune marathon, Society fundamental wisdom of adding housing to their portfolio. caserather study, than successful a sprint. As organizations is seen in the need “siting” to consider conflicts a Theyof The worried Fortune that Society, it would some impact employees their capacityquestioned to providethe wide range of issues, develop strategies and plans and then to get, and/or that the community opposition would be wrap-around services, that the funding would be difficult execute them effectively. formidable. Listening to these doubts, the leadership 14 shared their plan to proceed incrementally, building into community surfaced in a dispute about the housing of a which the organization could discontinue the project if not. It was not until much later that the voices of the Latino thetheir risk five-year to organizational supportive functioninghousing plan was “choice determined points” at highly-publicizedimportant lesson thatchild the murderer more disenfranchised at the Castle. Fortune members was the resulting areas of growth, the placement of “choice quick to reach out directly to this constituency, learning the points”to be too into great. the Theplanning organizational process and self-assessment the open debate and all creative outreach. helped to “plant the seeds” for the eventual acceptance of the community may be harder to identify, requiring more A takeaway lesson is that organizations should not by Fortune employees of a new, broader portfolio. rely on any one approach or strategy to identify all key The Fortune example demonstrates some of the stakeholders in the community. Neighborhood meetings may ways that leaders can best shepherd their organization be ideal for attracting some stakeholders, but not others. when making a decision about launching a new initiative: all. It is necessary to reach out to the community through Electeda variety officials of methods may and represent in various some venues constituents,, e.g., churches, but not adopting a two-phase assessment and openly sharing the schools, political events, community meetings, other social results; making necessary changes to the organization agencies, media, etc. appropriate,and offering demonstratingopportunities for an unwaveringgrowth and beliefdevelopment; in the listeningproject and to thein the concerns organization’s of its members; capacity and, to accomplish once it. Two Pillars of Trust: Accessibility and Accountability Beginning Community Outreach: Identifying the Stakeholders is the importance of developing trust within the community. Identifying those groups of individuals who have a For thisUnderlying to happen, many an oforganization the recommendations needs to be in purposeful this Toolkit in choosing who will serve as the “face” to the community of supportive housing for formerly incarcerated individuals, strong interest in a community-impacting project, like representatives its CEO, a community liaison who was a the project. For example, Fortune identified as its primary is a necessary initial planning step (Iglesias, 2002; Allen, Fortune Society client known to the community as a drug 2007.) Some of the siting conflict literature identifies well-respecteddealer and who pillarhad since of the begun Harlem to turncommunity his life around.and a former canfive act key as stakeholder ambassadors audiences: in the community, government concerned (i.e., elected These individuals served as both spokespersons and active officialsneighbors/potential and governmental opponents, boards), the mediasupporters and the who listeners. courts5 (CASC, 2000.) Organizations should modify

this listing to fit their specific circumstances. part, they may be able to identify both potential supporters and Itopponents. is important A truism to reach in NIMBYout early situations to elected is officials.that the In closer the neighbor to the site of the project or service, the

This was true in the Fortune Academy case. The most vocalmore oppositionstrongly opposed to the Academythey are likelycame tofrom be (Dear,and was 1992.) led by residents of the building across the street. Fortune’s “faces” to the community (i.e., the CEO, the esteemed Harlem resident and the former drug dealer and Fortune client) spent a great deal of time listening to the concerns of these neighbors. Within a stakeholder group, it may be challenging to identify all impacted members. For example, identifying all

especially in racially or culturally diverse neighborhoods. Forconcerned example, neighbors/potential Fortune initially relied opponents upon Community may be difficult,

supporters and opponents. However, in the West Harlem Boardneighborhood meetings surrounding and elected the officials Academy, to help African identify Americans both were well represented at the Community Board meetings

5 This is true in cases in which the opposition to the whileproject theis in lessviolation politically of antidiscrimination integrated orLatino housing community laws. was

15 Once these key individuals are identified, they must be the facility with the community well before implementing continuously accessible to the community. The more accessible they are, the more trust will be established. Community them; inviting community members to visit existing phone calls must be returned promptly. Meetings that are locationsadditional and information to meet clients as necessary. and staff, Fortune and being used preparedall of importantmembers need to community to know how members to locate should these be individuals; attended, to answer questions thoroughly and/or finding out even if they do not directly relate to the organization’s not hiding information and had no secret plans that would project. (As was noted, Fortune’s community liaison bethese kept techniques hidden until to let it was the communitytoo late for theknow community that they towere still attends 6 + community meetings a month, some stop them from implementing them. eight years after the Academy opened its doors.) Importantly, being a good neighbor means listening to The other critical builder of trust is accountability. expressed with anger or hostility. It is understandable that may be the location of more social service agencies athe strong community’s and organized needs communityand requests, opposition even when to theya project are Communities,and projects than especially they believe less affluent is their communities fair share, have that could be seen as solely a negative force. While challenging for the organization, a clearly organized resistance As a can, however, make it easier to determine the needs of result,a long memorythe behavior of promises of the organizational (from government representatives or non- the stakeholders and, ultimately, to meet them. When willprofit be organizations) scrutinized to see that if theyhave do not what been they kept. say they will community members state their opposition to the project, it do, or colloquially, if they “walk the talk.” Virtually every is an opportunity to listen for their underlying needs and stakeholder who was interviewed about the Fortune concerns. There is no need to worry that listening will be confused with agreement about the merits of their concerns. always did what they said they would do – they followed Academythrough.” said The somethingimportance to of the this effect cannot that be “Fortune overstated. To be accountable to the community while still pursuing Ask questions and make sure that community members the mission and goals of the organization and the project knowfor collaboration. they have been Fortune’s heard. community Listening to liaison community advised needsthat organizations allows the organization should “use tothe find community’s opportunities wisdom” and added, “What they say is very close to them.” Beingrequires aa high“Good level ofNeighbor” tact and candor and much patience. Most simply, for an organization to be a good neighbor all members of the organization, i.e., staff and clients, need And finally, being a good neighbor also means that to the community in which it seeks to be located means: to present a positive impression of the organization. As being honest and straightforward about its organizational a former member of the Fortune Academy leadership mission, acting with transparency about its operations and noted, clients understood that when they were out in the plans, listening to the needs and concerns of the community, community, they were being scrutinized. If they behaved trying to meet or accommodate those needs whenever in a surly manner or were careless about littering, the possible and committing to making the neighborhood safer and stronger. The mindset underlying the “good neighbor” reputation of the Castle, and of other clients, would suffer. philosophy strives for a collaborative relationship with the Leadership Effectiveness: community, understanding that their fates are intertwined Embodying Strength and Grace and that they have in common certain overarching priorities. In the case of The Fortune Society leadership, they shared with all community members the goals of greater public compelling vision of the future as well as the ability to lead As noted previously, an effective leader has a clear neighborhood around the Castle more desirable for all. safety, decreased crime, family unification and making the Cameron,the organization 2005). Thethrough leader’s the changescommitment required may tobe meetsorely Honesty is one hallmark of a “Good Neighbor.” Candor testedthat future when (Goleman, faced with Boyatzis angry, organized & McKee, 2002;opposition Whetten to the & about an organization’s client population is essential. For organization’s plans. It is imperative that the leader, as well example, Fortune did not cover up the fact that they would as other organizational representatives, continue to show up. Their presence at meetings with community members formerly incarcerated individuals who needed it most, who are strongly opposed to their plans is crucial. When be providing temporary and longer-term housing for those without discriminating on the basis of criminal record. the situation gets hot, they may experience a natural desire

Their mission is to serve and to offer hope to those who individuals who have been convicted of a violent crime communityto be elsewhere. opposition. Being noticeably Showing up visible is the during minimum difficult have nowhere else to go; therefore, formerly incarcerated are accepted at the Castle as long as they demonstrate a leadershiptimes makes commitment. an enormous How difference the leader in handlesovercoming him/her- strong commitment to changing their lives, abide by the self is key. When in a room filled with angry opponents, the house rules, and pose no current threat of violence. leader should aspire to provide information and answer Transparency can be demonstrated by sharing plans for questions with grace and non-defensiveness. Mirroring the

16 reactions of the project opponents by expressing anger stakeholder group and/or living in the neighborhood or behaving defensively will be counterproductive. during the time that Fortune was developing the Finally, the connection between the organization’s leadership and the community can be viewed as a AcademyData were at organized the Castle and (1998-2002). analyzed with Participation the assistance in the relationship that needs to be built and continually nurtured. study was voluntary and confidentiality was assured. package – to identify common themes, become aware of organizational leadership. In order for a healthy relationship ofturning NVivo points, 8 – a qualitative and compare data relationships, analysis software perceptions, Asto develop,such, it takes the organization’s time and effort, leadership falling mustmostly behave on the responses and actions across the stakeholder groups. in ways that conveys that they are trustworthy. In such situations, community members are especially attuned to inconsistencies in a leader’s behavior. Therefore when an References organization leader says he or she is going to do something, workers alike say the Fortune Academy is a model for sending prisoners a key ingredient to building a successful and trusting Abramsky, S. (2004). “Return Address: Law enforcement and social or be somewhere, follow-through is imperative. This is relationship between the organization and the community. back home safely. So why is it still one of a kind?” City Limits, June 2004, 29-31, 38. Housing and Services.” National Alliance to End Homelessness Publication Allen,(www.remanlaw.co M. (2007). “Sixm Steps). to Building Community Support for Affordable V: Conclusion September 2006. Fortune Society’s journey toward becoming a provider Anderson, B. (2006). “Finding a Home.” Affordable Housing Finance, of supportive reentry housing for formerly incarcerated Housing for Previously Incarcerated People.” New York City: Common GroundBlack, K. Community & Cho, R. (2004). and Corporation “New Beginnings: for Supportive The Need Housing for Supportive Publication. strong reactions of anger and resistance from community membersmen and women to the siting began of with the Fortunemany challenges Academy - inincluding “their Burke, W.W. (2002). Organization Change: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications Inc. trust from neighbors who perceived common ground with Fortune’sbackyard” commitment - and ended successfullytoward making - with the acceptance community and Cho,Housing R., Gary, Developers, D., Ball, SocialL., & Ladov, Services M. (2002).Providers “A Guideand Their to Reentry Government stronger and safer. The resistance, anger and fear of Partners.”Supportive New Housing: York City:A Three Corporation Part Primer for forSupportive Non-Profit Housing Supportive Publication neighborhood members toward a residential facility for (www.CSH.org/publications). people with a history of incarceration (and/or of other “Community Building in Supportive Housing Developments.” (2006). New socially stigmatizing conditions) is not surprising. The York City: Corporation for Supportive Housing Publication (www.CSH, 2006.org/publications). and service providers with a better understanding of purpose of this document then is to equip policy makers Policymakers’ Guide.” New York City: Council of State Governments some guidelines for engaging with community members Cortes,Publication. K. & Rogers, S. (2010). “Reentry Housing Options: The viathe adynamics collaborative, of this transparent “NIMBY” reaction, approach and that to canoffer lead to successful initiatives and positive alliances. Dear, M. (1992). “Understanding and Overcoming the NIMBY Syndrome.” For additional information, see the References JournalDeutsch, of M. the (2006). American “Cooperation Planning andAssociation, Competition.” 58:3, 288-300.In Deutsch, M. section of this document for a roadmap of both scholarly and practical resources. Also, you may wish to visit The Coleman, P.T., & Marcus, E. (Eds.) The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Fortune Society’s website (www.fortunesociety.org) Theory and Practice (Second Edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Corrections Publication ( and/or contact them for more detailed information. Doble J. & Lindsay, M.f). (2003). “Is NIMBY Inevitable?” Center for Community htm.centerforcommunitycorrectionsorg/wp- content/1-nimby.pd New York City: Penguin Books. VI: Endnotes Fisher, R., Ury, W. and Patton, B., 1996. Getting to Yes (Second Edition). to Reality” (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ccdo/pub/pdf/facasestudy.pdf). Methodology “The Fortune Academy: Housing for Homeless Ex-Prisoners, From Dream www. Glauber, D. (1996). “The Evolution of Supportivel). Housing.” Shelterforce least one person from each of the following stakeholder Online, July-August Issue. Montclair, N.J.: National Housing Institute ( groupsData and were some obtained individuals from representingfifteen interviews more withthan atone nhi.org/online/issue/88/suphousing.htm Goldsmith, S. & Eimicke, W.B. (2008). “Moving Men into the Mainstream:i). Best Practices in Prisoner Reentry Assistance.” Civic Bulletin, No.51, stakeholder group: Fortune leadership and staff members March 2008 (www.manhattan-institute.org/cgi-bin/apMI/print.cg (6); elected and appointed political representatives of Goleman,Press. D., Boyatzis, R. & McKee, A. (2002). Primal Leadership: Learning the Castle neighborhood in West Harlem (3); neighbors to Lead With emotional Intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School ofpersons the Castle interviewed (4); members were ofworking community with anorganizations area (6); and uniformed service officers (1). The community “Guide for Developing Housing for Ex-Offenders.” (2004). United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Community Capacity 17 www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ccdo). CONTRIBUTORS Development Office, Weed and Seed Publication ( John Jay College of Criminal of former prisoners.” Probation Journal: The Journal of Community and Harding, A. & Harding, J. (2006). “Inclusion and exclusion in the re-housing of New York is a liberal arts collegeJustice ofdedicated The City to University education, CriminalHart Shegos, Justice. E. (2006). Vol. 53(2), “Thinking 137-153. Beyond NIMBY: Building Community Support for Supportive Housing.” In Family Matters: A Guide to Developing research and service in the

Supportive Housing Publication (www.CSH, 2006.org/publications). science and related areas of Family Supportive Housing, Ch.8. New York City: Corporation for public safety and public service. It strives fieldsto endow of criminal students justice, with the fire

Iglesias, T. (2002). “Managing Local Opposition to Affordable Housing: A skillspersonal of critical and social thinking growth and and effective creative communication; problem solving the that perspective results from New Approach to NIMBY.” Journal of Affordable Housing, 12:1, 78-121. and moral judgment that result from liberal studies; the capacity for

Kihlman, R.H. & Thomas, K.W. (1977). “Developing a Forced-Choice cultural,the ability historical, to acquire economic and evaluate and political information; forces the that ability shape to our navigate society. Measure of Conflict-Handling Behavior: The Mode Instrument.” advanced technological systems; and the awareness of the diverse Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37, 309-325. The Prisoner Reentry Institute (PRI) at John Jay College of Criminal Langan,Department P. & Levin,of Justice, D. (2002). Bureau “Recidivism of Justice Statistics. of Prisoners Released in 1994.” Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report. Washington, D.C.: United States Justice works to spur innovation and improve practice in the field of reentry by advancing knowledge; translating research into effective Marcus, E. (2006). Change and Conflict. In Deutsch, M. Coleman, P.T., & policymission, and PRI service develops, delivery; manages, and fosteringand evaluates effective innovative partnerships reentry between Marcus, E. (Eds.) The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and criminal justice and non-criminal justice disciplines. To achieve this Practice (Second Edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Recidivism.” Center for Impact Research Publication (www. andprojects; formerly provides incarcerated practitioners individuals and policymakers as a vehicle forwith successful cutting edge reentry McKean,impactresearch.org/documents/recidivismfullreprot.pd L. & Ransford, C. (2004). “Current Strategies for fReducing). tools and expertise; promotes education opportunities for currently

and reintegration; and creates synergy across fields and disciplines. Paper submitted at the National Symposium on Homelessness Research The Fortune Society Metraux, S., Roman, C., & Cho, R. (2007). “Incarceration and Homelessness.” service and advocacy held on March 1-2, 2007. Return of Prisoners to the Community,” (2005). New York City: Council of organization,is a nonprofit foundedsocial “ReportState Governments of the Re-Entry Publication Policy Council: (www.reentrypolicy.org/Report/TO Charting the Safe and SuccessfulC). is to support successful reentry from prison and promote alternatives toin incarceration,1967, whose mission thus strengthening the fabric of our communities. Fortune works to create Publication.Rodriguez, N. & Brown, B. (2003). “Preventing Homelessness Among a world where all who are incarcerated or formerly incarcerated can People Leaving Prison.” New York City: Vera Institute of Justice become positive, contributing members of society. We do this through a

Scally, C.P. (2005). “Housing for Ex-Offenders.” Shelterforce Online, forty years of experience working with people with criminal records. Institute ( l). holistic, one-stop model of service provision that is based on more than January/February 2005, Issue # 139. Montclair, N.J.: National Housing In 2007, The Fortune Society launched the David Rothenberg Center www.nhi.org/online/issues/139/exoffenders.htm for Public Policy (DRCPP).While Fortune has always engaged in Seiter, R.P. & Kadela, K.R. (2003). “Prisoner Reentry.” Crime and advocacy and community education, DRCPP is focused on the Delinquency 49, no.3. coordination of Fortune’s policy development, advocacy, technical

Senecal, G. & Reyburn, S. (2006). “The NIMBY Syndrome and the Health of integrates Fortune’s internal expertise – the life experience of Communities.” Canadian Journal of Urban Research, Winter, 2006. assistance, training, and community education efforts. DRCPP experience as a longstanding direct service provider. “Siting Drug and Alcohol Treatment Programs: Legal Challenges to and Human Resources, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services our formerly incarcerated staff and clients and our first-hand Administrationthe NIMBY Syndrome.” (SAMHSA). (1995). Technical United Assistance States Department Publication of Health (TAP) Series www.kap.samhsa.gov?products/ The International Center for Cooperation and m). 14, DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 95-3050 ( “Siting of Homeless Housing and Services and Best Practices for Common developing knowledge and practice to promote manuals/taps/14a.ht Conflict Resolution (ICCCR) is committed to Acceptance.” (2000). Community Acceptance Strategies Consortium and www. cooperation, and social justice. Based at Teachers constructive conflict resolution, effective g). Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California Publication ( Wilson,nonprofithousing.or J., et al. (2005). “Smoothing the Path From Prison to Home: A College,Emeritus Columbia Morton Deutsch,University, one the of centerthe world’s was Summary.” New York City: Vera Institute of Justice Publication. founded in 1986 under the direction of Professor is grounded in education: to support individuals, communities and Whetten, D.A. and Cameron, K.S. (2005). Developing Management Skills most respected scholars of conflict resolution. The ICCCR’s mission

organizations in better understanding the nature of conflict and in (Sixth Edition). New York City: Prentice-Hall. developingresearch, including skills and participatory settings to help action them research, resolve directly conflict linkseffectively. the In White,Brunswick, J. & Ashton, Canada. B. (1992). “Meeting Housing Needs and the NIMBY creationaddition, of the knowledge Center’s pedagogy with its application is based in toresearch issues of and social theory; justice. applied Syndrome.” Department of Geography, Mount Allison University, New As part of the Center’s commitment to linking research and practice, researchers from the ICCCR partnered with Fortune and Wynne-Edwards,Initiative.” Government J. (2002). of Canada. “Overcoming (www.homelessness.gc.c Community Oppositiona). to PRI to provide scholarly and research support in producing this Homelessness Sheltering Projects Under the National Homelessness toolkit. ICCCR researchers performed literature reviews, conducted interviews, analyzed data and wrote various sections of this toolkit.

18 ABOUT THIS TOOLKIT With over 725,000 men and women being released from prison each year, the need for housing assistance for the formerly incarcerated population is immense. Indeed, in addition to linking homelessness and incarceration, ofresearch barriers has place identified the formerly a significant incarcerated relationship population between at a disadvantagehomelessness when and re-offending.trying to access Unfortunately,safe and stable housing.a number For some, returning home to their family is not an option as family members may be unwilling or unable to accommodate them. Accessing housing in the private market also presents a challenge given high prices and landlords’ exercising their personal discretion to discriminate against people with criminal histories. Finally, public housing policies – both at the federal and local level – deny access to individuals with certain criminal convictions.

thisCommunity-based overwhelming serviceneed with providers few resources. around theThis country toolkit highlightsworking in the the experience reentry field of The have Fortune begun to Society respond in its to development of a housing project in West Harlem. Through Fortune’s experience, organizations can glean strategies to help them overcome one of the greatest challenges associated with providing housing to formerly incarcerated men and delays, or even shut down. This case study documents howwomen. an organization NIMBY opposition can address can result a myriad in significant of community project concerns and ultimately garner support for its project. By this toolkit provides guidance and encouragement to those organizationsoffering tangible working steps to and assist lessons formerly learned incarcerated by Fortune, people and create safer communities.